Patricia Goodrich asked the Amarillo City Commission on Tuesday to at least consider it. Amarillo Mayor Paul Harpole floated the idea at a previous commission work session. I’ve at times thought the same thing.

Why not a public referendum, likely in the spring, and let Amarillo voters determine whether the city should have a ban on using hand-held devices while driving?

Absent scientific polling, the majority for and against vary depending on the day and the feedback method. It’s needed. No, it’s an overreach. It’s the best way to halt texting. No, it’s a loss of a convenient way of life, and the dangers are overblown.

But the city commission did not go the public referendum route. Harpole’s suggestion, so there could be increased discussion and education, never got much traction. In a 4-1 vote, with Jim Simms voting against, the commission approved the hand-held ban for the second and final time Tuesday. It will go into effect in the next 30 to 60 days.

“We fully expect this is not the final say on the issue,” Commissioner Ellen Robertson Green said. “This is part of the process.”

The commission has been accused of many things, and that goes with the territory for one that’s as proactive as this one is. But arrogance and close-mindedness shouldn’t be two of them.

“Some individuals say we’re not listening,” Commissioner Brian Eades said. “There’s a pattern in my five years on this commission that there are times if we don’t agree with an individual, that we’re not listening. We’re listening, but we’re listening to other people, too.”

Over the months, the commission has heard and talked with both sides, probably ad nauseam. They asked for and got a report — about 3 inches thick — from the traffic commission. They did their homework.

Upon further review, they did the right thing by not passing the buck, but making a decision. It may or may not be the right decision, but it’s the right act. That’s why they get the big bucks — $10 a week.

“It’s the democratic process to elect people to represent you,” said Green. “You give them the job and ask they do the hard research necessary. I just think people elected us to make tough decisions, and to the best of our ability, arrive at the right decision.”

That’s what Americans do. Occasionally, propositions pop up that the populace yawns at. Not very often do we actually vote on juicy laws or even ordinances. Whether it’s a state legislature, the halls of Congress or city commission chambers, we vote for officials who best represent our views and trust them to make reasonable, informed decisions.

If they don’t, we can vote them out. And if there’s steam still coming out of your ears because of the commission’s 4-1 vote, guess what? You can still vote on the ban.

It will take some work, but the city charter provides an avenue to put a commission’s decision up to a general vote.

It will first take five signatures from an Initiative Committee, and then petition signatures of 25 percent of registered city voters determined by the number who voted in the last municipal election. In May 2011, a little more than 14,800 voted, meaning 3,700 signatures are required.

The smoking ordinance was twice put to a vote in the last seven years, and twice narrowly defeated. But that didn’t come from a commission too milquetoast to make a decision, but from a group, Breathe Easy Amarillo, who got enough support to force the proposed ordinance to a vote.

“It’s not popular to say, but it’s the truth, but democracy is very messy,” Green said. “It’s not always the easiest road to take, but it’s brought us this far, and find me another system that’s better. That’s what democracy is about. You elect officials to make tough decisions, but would I be surprised if we end up with a vote on this in May? No.”

If there isn’t one, it’s because commissioners think the opposition will come to at least accept it, even if not agreeing with it. The ordinance was crafted, Harpole said, to have some teeth to get at texting, but never intrusive enough to prohibit hands-free devices.

“It’s not perfect by any means,” Harpole said, “but if you’re holding a phone to your ear, and driving the streets of Amarillo, and a police officer sees you, you’ll get a ticket. If you’re weaving down the road with your head down, going slowly and not paying attention, you’ll get a ticket.

“Beyond that, we’re not going to have police on all these corners looking for this any more than they would look for other violations.”

The commission has spoken. The people spoke in May 2011 when four of the five on the commission got at least 73 percent of the vote. The people can speak again. It’s all part of the process.

Jon Mark Beilue is a Globe-News columnist. He can be reached at jon.beilue@amarillo.com or 806-345-3318. His blog appears on amarillo.com. Follow him on Twitter: @jonmarkbeilue.

Source: Marcus W. Norris, City Attorney

Summary of Ordinance 7366

■ General Rule: A driver is prohibited from using a hand-held cellphone (or other wireless communication devices) for calls, texts and other apps or functions, while driving a motor vehicle on any public street, highway or alley.

This prohibition does not apply to a driver who uses a speakerphone feature, voice-activated feature or device or an accessory hands-free device (such as a Bluetooth). A driver may press the button(s) necessary to use/activate such feature or device.

This prohibition does not apply to a GPS unit that is separate from a cellphone. This is due to the state law definitions that the ordinance tracks.

■ Exceptions: A driver may use a hand-held cellphone only in these circumstances:

1. When the car is lawfully parked; this does not mean while stopped at a traffic control device.

2. A call for fire/police/EMS/hospital or clinic/doctor’s office/other bonafide emergency/an imminent danger to life and safety.

3. A government employee, first responder or volunteer while then acting in official capacity with an immediate need to give or receive necessary official information.

4. A HAM operator using his/her radio (this exemption is provided by federal law).

■ Effective date: The ordinance requires the city to erect warning signs at the city limits and other locations around town. Once those signs are installed, there will be major media announcements of the effective date (estimate is 30 to 60 days). The police will begin enforcement by issuing warnings to drivers during the first few weeks.